This past weekend Bill Cosby’s court ordeal ended up in a mistrial. The jurors couldn’t come together on a unanimous verdict over his innocence or guilt. For those of you who don’t know this story, Mr. Cosby was brought up on charges of drugging and sexually violating a woman (Andrea Constand) at his suburban home in 2004. There are over 60 other cases of different women claiming that Cosby did the same thing to them (however the statute of limitations ran out on the others so they can not prosecute). I talked to several people about this trial and found lots of different opinions. Let’s take a look at some points: First, if Cosby had actually done the things that she claimed he did, then “why on earth” would she revisit him and even remain friends with him after that? Just that fact alone has me scratching my head. Let me give you a similar scenario: If you put your hand in the lion’s cage and he bites it, that would be terrible. However, should it be the lion’s fault if you go back and do the exact same thing again? Please don’t think that I am taking up for Cosby, because I am not. However, this doesn’t make sense to me. Also the fact that she claimed to be sure of a lot of things in her testimony, but her current testimony contradicted earlier testimonies. When you add in the fact that it took her so long to press charges it all adds up to “uncertainty” and most times in court uncertainty won’t cut it. If she has problems remembering some things, then how will we know that she doesn’t have problems remembering “most” things? In a court of law, lawyers will “pounce” on uncertainty. If they can poke holes in your testimony then what you say may actually help their case. I don’t know if Cosby will be found guilty in a second trial or not, but I do know that he is a tremendously popular figure who has had a great positive image for most of his career. Also, he is rich and can afford the best lawyers to help him. However, none of this means that he is innocent, and people need to realize that there is a big difference between being innocent and “Not being proven guilty.” When you have no proof other than your own words then you need to be “very convincing” to get a conviction. Personally, if over 60 women all claimed that Cosby drugged and violated them then I myself would tend to believe that he is guilty. However, even if I thought that way I would still not convict him of anything without “absolute” proof (and that might be the weakest part of the prosecutor’s agenda). Obviously sex happened. The real question is whether it was voluntary or not. I don’t believe it was (and I doubt anyone else believes it either). If they try to retry this case they will need to do better in presenting facts and details. Right now with what they have it just doesn’t seem like it’s enough to convict him. I would not support anyone who abuses or violates women, but everyone is entitled to a fair trial based on the evidence against him or her. Should they retry Cosby? In my opinion I think this original trial was the best shot that they had. I just can’t imagine them doing any better in presenting their case a second time. It could happen, but unless some new evidence comes up I just can’t see it. Cosby’s positive image may now be tainted, but I just don’t think there is enough evidence to send him to jail. That is just my opinion. Thank you for checking out my Daily Thought and as always I wish you the very best that life has to offer.
Freddie Jackson in concert with Brett Jolly on bass